Pages

Thursday, November 29, 2007

Development assignments by themselves don't always produce new learning and behavioral change. We need to step back and reflect, and make sense of the experience. Here are some questions a leader can ask themselves, or better yet, discuss with a coach.Questions That Facilitate Learning From a Development Assignmentexcerpts from Handbook of Leadership Development Cynthia D. McCauley, Russ S. Moxley, and Ellen Van Velsor; published by the Center for Creative Leadership, Greensboro, NC

About yourself:

What strengths do I bring to this job? What will help me?What are my development needs? What might hinder me from being effective and successful?What aspects of this job may be particularly challenging for me, given my background, experience, strengths, and development needs? (Is the role clear or ambiguous? Will I have the formal authority to do what I need to do? Are there obstacles, and if so, how might I overcome them?)What can I learn from this job? What do I need to learn?What do I need to know to be able to do this job effectively?What might make it difficult for me to learn?

About the assignment:

What are the organization’s objectives for me in this job?What are my own personal objectives in this job?How does this job fit with the organization’s mission, values, and goals?What do I know about this job? What are the tasks, responsibilities, and requirements? What are the key leadership challenges?What are my subordinates like?What is my boss like?Am I likely to encounter any resistance? What steps can I take to overcome it?Who can help me? Where can I turn for support?What other resources do I have available to me?Is there anything I would like to change about this assignment?

During and after the assignment:

How can I monitor my learning progress? (For example, keep a journal, find a person to be a “learning partner”, seek feedback often, either formally or informally)What am I learning? Anything I did not expect?What am I not learning that I thought or hoped I would? Why?How will I know I have learned what I wanted and needed to learn?

Sunday, November 25, 2007

It’s seems like the profession of management, or supervision, has fallen out of style these days. I hear things like’ “we need more leaders, and less managers”, and “well, she’s a good manager, but not a leader”. A lot of leadership books, courses, and gurus espouse the wonderful virtues of leadership, while contrasting against the archaic, horrible characteristics of management. I also see various lists of leadership characteristics, often compared side-by-side to a management list, encouraging aspiring leaders to be more like leaders, and less like managers. As if you can turn off one switch and turn on another.It’s almost as if they are saying: leadership – good; management – bad. I think the comparison, or differentiation, is kind of silly and isn’t really very helpful when it comes to developing leaders or improving our own leadership skills.I find it more practical to refer to “leader” as a role, someone who is in a position of leadership (we used to call them managers and supervisors). Someone in one of these roles needs to be effective in order to be successful. So what does it take to be effective? Well, there are a thousand books on the subject of what it takes to be an effective leader, everything from “Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun”, to “Leadership the Sopranos Way”. I’d rather take a look at some proven, research-based lists of competencies (skills, traits, knowledge). Lominger, PDI, CCL, DDI all have done extensive research, studying successful leaders and dissecting what makes them tick. When you look at the lists of competencies, you’ll find elements of leadership (setting a vision, inspiring others) and elements of management (planning, performance management). Follow a successful leader around for a week, and you’ll see her doing many of these things, often during the same meeting of conversation. For example, during a staff meeting the leader might describe a vision for a new idea, then move into planning on how to implement the idea, while getting everyone all fired up and discussing on how to lead the change, to figuring how much it’s going to cost.

So how about if we just focus on what it takes for a leader to be successful in a specific context, and then how to develop those competencies Wouldn’t that be a better use of our time and energy? Although it probably wouldn’t sell a lot of books and make for a dull keynote speech.

Listen to what General Mills CEO Steve Sanger recently told 90 of his colleagues: "As you all know, last year my team told me that I needed to do a better job of coaching my direct reports. I just reviewed my 360-degree feedback. I have been working on becoming a better coach for the past year or so. I'm still not doing quite as well as I want, but I'm getting a lot better. My coworkers have been helping me improve. Another thing that I feel good about is the fact that my scores on 'effectively responds to feedback' are so high this year."While listening to Steve speak so openly to coworkers about his efforts to develop himself as a leader, I realized how much the world has changed. Twenty years ago, few CEOs received feedback from their colleagues. Even fewer candidly discussed that feedback and their personal developmental plans. Today, many of the world's most respected chief executives are setting a positive example by opening up, striving continually to develop themselves as leaders. In fact, organizations that do the best job of cranking out leaders tend to have CEOs like Steve Sanger who are directly and actively involved in leadership development. That has certainly been my experience. This has also been confirmed by a recently completed research project led by Marc Effron at Hewitt Associates, one of the largest HR consulting firms. Hewitt and Chief Executive magazine put General Mills on their latest list of the top-20 companies for leaders, among such familiar names as IBM and General Electric.Hewitt found that these organizations tend to more actively manage their talent. They put lots of focus on identifying high-potential people, better differentiate compensation, serve up the right kinds of development opportunities, and closely watch turnover. But crucial to all these efforts were CEO support and involvement.No question, one of the best ways top executives can get their leaders to improve is to work on improving themselves. Leading by example can mean a lot more than leading by public-relations hype.Michael Dell, whose company made the Hewitt list, is a perfect example. As one of the most successful leaders in business history, he could easily have an attitude that says, "I am Michael Dell and you aren't! I don't really need to work on developing myself." Michael, however, has the opposite approach. He has done an amazing job of sincerely discussing his personal challenges with leaders across the company. He is a living case study from whom everyone at Dell is learning. His leadership example makes it hard for any leader to act arrogant or to communicate that he or she has nothing to improve upon.Johnson & Johnson, tied for first on the top-20 list, has successfully involved its executives in leadership development. Its CEOs, formerly Ralph Larsen and now Bill Weldon, and top executive team regularly participate in a variety of leadership-building activities. Having a dialogue with the CEO about his business challenges and developmental needs makes it a lot easier for employees to discuss their own business challenges and developmental needs.Executive candor can even help turn around a troubled company. Consider Northrop Grumman, the aerospace defense contractor. CEO Kent Kresa inherited a company that had a poor reputation for integrity, a battered stock price, and an unfortunate reputation as one of the least-admired companies in its industry. His leadership team reversed the company's poor image and engineered an amazing turnaround – ultimately becoming the Forbes’ most-admired company. From the beginning of the process, Kent led by example. He communicated clear expectations for ethics, values, and behavior. He made sure that he was evaluated by the same standards that he set for everyone else. He consistently reached out to coworkers. He didn't just work to develop his leaders--he created an environment in which the company's leaders were working to develop him.Unfortunately, in the same way that CEO support and involvement can help companies nurture leaders, CEO arrogance can have the opposite effect. When the boss acts like a little god and tells everyone else they need to improve, that behavior can be copied at every level of management. Every level then points out how the level below it needs to change. The end result: No one gets much better.The principle of leadership development by personal example doesn't apply just to CEOs. It applies to all levels of management. All good leaders want their people to grow and develop on the job. Who knows? If we work hard to improve ourselves, we might even encourage the people around us to do the same thing.

Saturday, November 24, 2007

Focus on current performance.Reliance on multirater (360°) feedback, which doesn’t predict potential, but only current competencies.

Inconsistent criteria, vision, or expectations.Three out of four companies admit that they lack clear criteria for what actually determines potential. Or they haven’t arrived at a consistent vision of what theirfuture culture should be (and thus how future leaders would fit into this vision), or what expectations for their future leaders are.

Dependence on too few, unchallenged perspectives.We fell into this trap. With only 16 managers in our Acceleration Pool, each slot becomes highly important. So when it became clear we’d made a mistake in oneinstance after allowing someone into the pool when only one executive knew him well, we learned an important lesson.

Equal representation, current affiliation bias.Giving in to political pressure for equal representation by department rather than truly identifying the best people.

Emergence of “strength”-based models.Fine for targeting specific roles, perhaps, but too narrow as a forecast of general management potential. Focusing only on strengths leads to missed potential and wasted talent; it also fails to identify derailers that might be camouflaged under a seemingly solid profile.

Poor differentiation between potential and diagnostic assessments.Confusing diagnostic assessments of a manager’s competencies with an “investment choice” based on past performance plus future potential

And I'll add my own:

Over reliance on a single, "silver bullet" test. Assessments can be part of an assessment process - IQ for intelligence, a 360 assessment against potential criteria, a properly benchmarked behavioral or motivational preference inventory, behavioral based interviews, and a variety of simulations all can be parts of a valid and reliable potential assessment process. But if there was a single leadership potential assessment test, everyone would be using it and there wouldn't be a 50% or more CEO failure rate.

Friday, November 23, 2007

Here’s a summary of three studies on how to identify leadership potential:

Development Dimensions InternationalDDI has developed a set of criteria that they say will accurately predict executive success, based on their own experience and research, and research by others, including work by Jim Collins for his book Good to Great; Morgan W. McCall, Jr.'sHigh Flyers; and Ann Howard and Doug Bray's landmark 30-year study of professional and personal development at AT&T. DDI’s list:

1. Propensity to lead. They step up to leadership opportunities.2. They bring out the best in others3. Authenticity. They have integrity, admit mistakes, and don’t let their egos get in their way4. Receptivity to feedback. They seek out and welcome feedback5. Learning agility. See Lominger research6. Adaptability. Adaptability reflects a person's skill at juggling competing demands and adjusting to new situations and people. A key here is maintaining an unswerving, "can do" attitude in the face of change.7. Navigates ambiguity. This trait enables people to simplify complex issues and make decisions without having all the facts.8. Conceptual thinking. Like great chess players and baseball managers,the best leaders always have the big picture in mind. Their ability to think two, three, or more moves ahead is what separates them from competitors.9. Cultural fit10. Passion for results

Lominger, Inc.Lominger and Eichenger did a study that linked “learning agility” as a predictor of leadership success. The four types are learning agility are:1. People Agility: Describes people who know themselves well, learn from experience, treat others constructively, and are cool and resilient under the pressures of change.

2. Results Agility: Describes people who get results under tough conditions, inspire others to perform beyond normal, and exhibit the sort of presence that builds confidence in others.

3. Mental Agility: Describes people who think through problems from a fresh point of view and are comfortable with complexity, ambiguity, and explaining their thinking to others.

4. Change Agility: Describes people who are curious, have a passion for ideas, like to experiment with test cases, and engage in skill-building activities.

Each of these factors was significantly associated with consideration as a high potential, having good-to-high performance, and staying out of trouble. People high in learning agility and likely high potentials:

3. Get more out of these experiences because they have an interest in making sense of them; and

4. Perform better because they incorporate new skills into their repertoire.

The face they show to the outside world is:

1. Eager to learn about self, others, and ideas.

2. Showing genuine willingness to learn from feedback and experience and change their behavior and viewpoints as a result.

3. Interested in helping people think and experiment.

4. Resilient and philosophical about what happens to people who push change.

5. Uncompromising: While wide-open to diversity, multiple sources, and a range of views, once they incorporate these into their thinking, they are described as stalwart in pushing their notions. They rely on logic, well-thought-through ideas, cool communications, and perseverance to sell their points.

Ram CharinRam Charan lists in his book, Know How, eleven criteria for spotting future leaders in your organization. He suggests that you repeatedly practice making judgments of other people and reflect on why you might have missed in some cases. Did the individual have the potential you saw in them? How good are your judgments compared to others judgments on the same individual?1. They consistently deliver ambitious results.2. They continuously demonstrate growth, adaptability, and learning better and faster than their excellently performing peers.3. They seize the opportunity for challenging, bigger assignments, thereby expanding capability and capacity and improving judgment.4. They have the ability to think through the business and take leaps of imagination to grow the business.5. They are driven to take things to the next level.6. Their powers of observation are very acute, forming judgments of people by focusing on their decisions, behaviors, and actions, rather than relying on initial reactions and gut instincts; they can mentally detect and construct the “DNA” of a person.7. They come to the point succinctly, are clear thinkers, and have the courage to state a point-of-view even though listeners may react adversely.8. They ask incisive questions that open minds and incite the imagination.9. They perceptively judge their own direct reports, have the courage to give them honest feedback so the direct reports grow; they dig into cause and effect if a direct report is failing.10. They know the non-negotiable criteria of the job of heir direct reports and match the job with the person; of there is a mismatch they deal with it promptly.11. They are able to spot talent and see the “God’s gift” of other individuals.

1. Know what the target looks like. There are hundreds of books out there that claim to offer the secrets of how to be a great leader or manager, including “Leadership Secrets of Attila the Hun” to “Leadership the Soprano’s Way”. It can be overwhelming, confusing, and sometimes contradictory. So what’s an aspiring leader to do? This is why as a practitioner (someone who’s responsible for leadership development within a company), it’s important to clearly define the critical leadership competencies that are required now and in the future in order for the business to succeed. There are great research-based models to pick from (Lominger, CCL, PDI, DDI), so there’s no need to start from scratch. I’ve found it’s best to first understand your company’s strategy and leadership requirements, create a draft competency model, then engage your CEO and senior executives, as well as other key stakeholders to validate the model. If you’re an aspiring leader with no company model, then study the successful leaders in your company. Talk to them, ask them how they’ve been successful, then supplement this information with a couple good books (see list on this blog).

2. Know where you stand against the target – seek out feedback. If you have access to one, a 360 degree assessment is a great way to gather confidential feedback on your leadership skills. Even better if the assessment is based on your company’s leadership model. You can also ask trusted colleagues for ongoing feedback. If there’s something specific you’re trying to improve, like listening skills, or assertiveness, you can ask your manager, a coach, or colleague to observe you and give you feedback on that skill. While feedback is one of the most powerful sources of development, unfortunately, it’s often lacking. First of all, managers just aren’t good at it. In fact, most people aren’t comfortable giving feedback. That, combined with our own natural emotional response to feedback (fight or flight), we often don’t get enough of it. And it gets worse the higher we get in an organization (the “it’s lonely at the top” syndrome).

3. Have a reason to develop – be motivated. It’s almost impossible for someone to develop if they don’t want to. The motivation has to come from within, some kind driving force. That’s usually not a problem with successful, ambitious people – improving leadership their leadership skills is often seen as a key to their success. For others, becoming a great leader is almost a calling, part of a purpose driven-driven life.

4. Get specific. I’ve seen so many development plans that say things like, “improve my leadership skills”, or “become a better leader”. Nice intentions, but pretty worthless when it comes to real development. You need to drill down and uncover the behaviors that if improved, will make the greatest improvement in your effectiveness as a leader. And oh by the way – with all due respects to Marcus Buckingham (Discover you Strengths), weaknesses do matter. It’s your weaknesses that will hold you back, so find out what they are and fix them.

5. Create a plan – and put your plan in writing. The research is clear – people that set goals are more successful than those that don’t, even better if they are written and even better if they are specific. Create your own “Individual Development Plan” (IDP). Do it – you deserve it.

6. Hit the need or needs with every learning method available. For some big needs, a job change may be the best development remedy (and the most powerful). In lieu of that, look for projects that require you to use the skill you are trying to develop. For example, if you’re trying to become a better listener, lead a project where you’re not the subject matter expert, so you’re forced to listen to others. Learn from other people (experts, mentors, coaches, etc…), from courses and books. Whatever you do, make sure you’re really challenging yourself. A robust development plan should make you a little queasy just thinking about it, there should be a risk of failure. It’s that “development heat” that causes the most impactful behavioral changes.

7. Make sense of it all. Think about what you did, what you read, what you learned. What were the lessons? What should you incorporate as a permanent part of your repertoire? What should you reject? What did you learn about yourself? It’s often helpful to have a trusted coach or mentor to help you with those “V8 moments”.

8. Finally, develop a sense of “learning agility”. A recent study showed that learning agility was the single most significant predictor of leadership success. Be curious, be open to new experiences, try new things, experiment, and take pride in being able to tackle the new and unknown. Enjoy the journey!

Wednesday, November 21, 2007

We all know that We “learning from others” is one of the most effective ways that leaders develop. Whenever I ask leaders to think back and reflect on how they developed their leadership capabilities, they inevitably will mention two categories of managers they’ve learned from. First, there’s the role model, inspiration leaders that they observed and got advice from. Then there are the “boss from hell” examples – the ones we look at and say “that’s how not to be a leader – and I vow never, never to act like that!”There’s already a lot of information on this blog about great leaders… but what about the worst leaders? Can’t we learn from them as well?

So here it is… my list of the 10 worst leaders of all time! Please comment to add your own favorite worst.

10. The Steve Carell character in “The Office”, Michael Scott. With unshaken enthusiasm, Michael believes he is the office funnyman, a fountain of business wisdom and his employees' cool friend. He has no clue that his employees tolerate his inappropriate behavior only because he signs their paychecks. Painstakingly trying to be liked and look cool, Michael comes off alternately absurd and pathetic. His prize possession is his "World's Greatest Boss" mug -- which he had to buy for himself. See Youtube video montage on the left.

9. Vlad the Impaler (15th century): Author Bram Stoker based his signature character Dracula on him. However, "The Impaler" did not kill to feed but for the pleasure of watching others suffer. It has been said he caused more "rivers of blood" than any other tyrant in history. Dracula is a teddy bear compared to this guy.

8. Dagwood’s J.C. (Julius Caesar) , the tyrannical boss, who frequently threatens to fire Dagwood from his workplace when (as frequently happens) Dagwood either botches or does not finish his work, sleeps on the job, comes into work late, or pesters Dithers for a raise or promotion.

7. Charles Dicken’s Scrooge. Scrooge has only disgust for the poor, thinking many would be better off dead, "decreasing the surplus population”. He has a particular distaste for the merriment of Christmas, his single act of kindness being that he gives his clerk, Bob Cratchit, the day off with pay, more as a result of social mores than any true kindness on his part. He sees the practice as akin to having his pocket picked on an annual basis.

6. Perry White, Clark Kent’s boss. Perry is famous for being boisterous and loud, as well as being a fairly strict editor. He is known for shouting, "Great Ceaser's ghost!" when angry, exasperated or surprised. Perry also dislikes being called "chief" and typically responds by shouting, "Don't call me chief!"--often in response to remarks made by Jimmy Olsen.

5. Gorden Gecko, from the 1987 file “Wall Street. Some classic Gecko quotes:- "Greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right. Greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms, greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge has marked the upward surge of mankind.""And if you need a friend, get a dog.""Lunch is for wimps."

4. Pol Pot (Cambodia; 1975-1979): He was influenced by Mao's cultural revolution, and 25 percent of Cambodia's population died from starvation, overwork and executions in Pol Pot's attempt to form a Communist peasant farming society. He conducted deadly purges to rid the area of the "old society," and anyone suspected of being disloyal was shot or bludgeoned with an ax.

3. Charles Montgomery Burns, normally referred to as Mr. Burns or "Monty" of the Springfield Nuclear Power Plant and Homer Simpson's boss. Mr. Burns also embodies the stereotype of a manager: he forgets his employees' names (especially Homer, despite the fact that they seem to interact on a daily basis) and is unconcerned for their safety and well-being. His aspirations to apply obsolete technology to everyday life or references to Victorian era people or places provide a common source of humor on the show. Kent Brockman also credits Mr. Burns with having stolen Christmas from 1981 to 1985. Recently he has become less evil and more eccentric. His trademark expression is the word "Excellent", muttered slowly in a low, sinister voice while tenting his fingertips.

2. Tie: Hitler and Stalin. Nuff said.

1. And the all time, all around worst leader….. The pointy haired boss from Dilbert (otherwise known as PHB)! A company that has too many PHBs is often called a PHC, or pointy haired company. He's every employee's worst nightmare. He wasn't born mean and unscrupulous, he worked hard at it. And succeeded. As for stupidity, well, some things are inborn. His top priorities are the bottom line and looking good in front of his subordinates and superiors (not necessarily in that order). Of absolutely no concern to him is the professional or personal well-being of his employees. The Boss is technologically challenged but he stays current on all the latest business trends, even though he rarely understands them. See YouTube montage on the left.

Sunday, November 18, 2007

Hay Group and CEO Magizine released a study that identified the best companies for leaders and leadership development practices for 2006. Here's the news release:

PHILADELPHIA, January 4, 2007: General Electric ranks number one in the 2006 Best Companies for Leaders study, conducted by Hay Group in partnership with Chief Executive magazine. The study highlights the best practices for identifying and fostering leadership talent."An estimated 75 million workers will retire in the U.S. in the next 5 to 10 years , including 50% of CEOs from major corporations," said Mary Fontaine, vice president and general manager of Hay Group's McClelland Center for Research and Innovation. "There's an urgent need for leadership with only 45 million younger workers available to fill those roles. Some sectors and markets are already battling for talent and leaders. Within a few years it will be a full-scale war. Those companies that are not already preparing are putting their futures at risk."The concern is not isolated to the U.S. and Western Europe where aging Baby Boomers are readying to retire. In emerging and developing countries—particularly in China, Eastern Europe, Brazil, and elsewhere—the need is to bring in and develop enough leaders to maintain their pace of growth.Focusing on identifying and managing the talents of high potential candidates will rise to the top of the agenda, predicted Fontaine. "Organizations that are able to identify, develop, and promote their leaders from within will find themselves better positioned than their peers to win the war for leaders—and to safeguard their organizational futures. The top companies are already focused on this. Those companies which are not prepared will be forced to rely on external recruitment—which is usually much more expensive and less dependable than internal promotion."Who are the best companies?The 2006 Top 20 Best Companies for Leaders:General ElectricProcter & GamblePepsiCoCitigroupJohnson & JohnsonHSBC HoldingsBASFHome DepotIBMCoca-ColaDellMicrosoftNovartisVerizon CommunicationsNestleLockheed MartinGlaxoSmithKlineAmgenHewlett-PackardBAE SystemsThese companies are a worthy benchmark group for our analysis: Their average five-year total shareholder return beat the S&P 500 over the same period by 3.53%. This period covers both the bleak years following the downturn and 9/11 as well as the recent surge in the S&P.And what do they do?The study identified the practices followed by the Best Companies for Leaders. The top three of the six best practices in 2005 were also the top three for 2006 and account for 68% of the variance in the number and quality of leaders as reported by each organization. 2006 Best Practices for Leadership DevelopmentHaving leaders at all levels who focus on creating a work climate that motivates employees to perform at their best.Ensuring that the company and its senior management make leadership development a top priority.Providing training and coaching to help intact leadership teams, as well as the individual leaders, work together more effectively.The remaining best practices highlight the need to start early on mid-level managers and high potentials:Rotational job assignments for high potentials.External leadership development programs for mid-level managers.Web-based self study leadership modules for mid-level managers.Executive MBA programs for mid-level managers."The Top 20 companies are far more likely to use the top practices than their peers," said Fontaine. "And, while many of the companies we looked at employ all of the practices, the top ones use them by a much wider margin."In addition to identifying the practices that companies should focus on to develop their next generation of leaders, the study also flagged activities that do not add value—at least not if your goal is to identify and develop leaders.Practices that waste resources include:Outdoor activity-based programsPaper-based self-study leadership modulesJob shadowing for senior managersExecutive MBAs and web-based self study modules became worst practices when implemented too late in the executive’s career"These practices may achieve other objectives, such as personal rewards or short-term team building," continued Fontaine. "But they don't help companies develop more, better leaders."The shortage of talent and leaders will inevitably cause ripple effects elsewhere in business, particularly in placing inevitable further upward pressure on salaries and work/life balance issues. It will force organizations to pay a premium to hire talent from the outside, which is financially costly, takes time, and often fails.Fontaine provides this analogy: "Imagine a game of musical chairs. Those companies that are proactively dealing with the crisis now will be seated in the chairs [with leaders intact]. The ones that are too late will be left standing—watching. Where will you be when the music stops?"About the StudyFor the Best Companies for Leaders study, Hay Group surveyed 564 companies with at least $8 billion in revenue from around the world. Data were collected from three sources: surveys of leaders within the companies, surveys of leaders from peer companies, and interviews with relevant academics and search firm executives.Hay Group is well positioned to understand leadership traits with over 60 years of experience in the field, along with a database comprised of over 4.8 million assessments of 471,544 employees at 4,279 organizations. Over 38,000 of these individuals are at the executive level."Hay Group research shows it takes about three years to identify a high potential, and another 10 to prepare them for the executive suite," observed Fontaine. "The costs and risks of recruiting from the outside can be even higher. Yet how many major companies have a 13-year horizon in place for their talent development programs?"

Saturday, November 17, 2007

The performance and potential matrix (9 box grid) is one the best talent management tools I’ve ever used. Here’s a tutorial on how to use the tool:

What is it?

The matrix is used to evaluate an organization’s talent pool. Here’s the basic format:
The X axis (horizontal line) of 3 boxes assesses leadership performance and the Y axis of 3 boxes (vertical line) assesses leadership potential. A combination of Y and X axis makes up the box within the grid that the leader is placed. 1A - High Performance/High Potential, 3C - Low Performance/Low Potential, etc...

Why use it?

1. It’s a simple way to assess any population of leaders on two important dimensions

2. It’s a great way to facilitate a dialog amongst a senior leadership team. Teams use it to calibrate their expectations and ratings

3. With a good open debate, the multiple perspectives provide for a much more accurate assessment (vs. one person’s opinion)

4. The process can facilitate a shared sense of ownership for the organizations talent pool

5. It’s a great way to identify development needs and transition to development planning

How to use it

The tool is best if used by a team and facilitated by someone who has experience with the process. This could be an HR person, OD consultant, or someone responsible for leadership development or succession planning. You should present the tool and process to the team to make sure they all understand and buy in to the purpose and process. Don’t underestimate the amount of anxiety if a team has never done anything like this before (a ranking exercise). It’s best to decide ahead of time how performance will be assessed (use a leadership competency model if you have one) and how potential will be assessed (again, best to decide ahead of time – I use specific potential criteria).

You could also ask for any other relevant information, such as years in current position, diversity status, retention risk, or relocatability. I usually have each manager plot their direct report managers (one level at a time, so we’re comparing apples to apples) and send their completed grid to me. I then consolidate all of the names on to one grid. Either as part of a multi-day off-site meeting or a standalone four hour meeting bring copies of the consolidated grid and start the discussion.

It’s easier picking someone in the 1A box (highest performance and potential) where you think there may be little disagreement. Ask the sponsor manager to explain the rationale for the assessment. Ask lot’s of why’s, then invite all others to comment. Don’t rush it, the benefit of this process is in the discussion. After all have been heard from, if there is agreement, then you have a benchmark for all others to compare against. If disagreement in perception, ask the sponsor manager if they want to change their mind based on the feedback – usually they do – but if not, leave it. Pick another name until you establish the benchmark. You can then discuss rest of the names in the 1A box, then move to the bordering boxes (1B and 2A). Then move to the 3C box, and again, facilitate a dialog to establish another benchmark. Continue the discussion for each person, or as many as time permits.

If time, or most likely at a follow-up meeting, the team can then discuss development plans for each leader. For succession planning, the focus should be on the upper right hand corner boxes (1A, 1B, and 2A) – this is your high potential pool.

Next Steps

Follow-up on a quarterly basis to monitor development plans. Repeat the assessment process at least once a year.

Sunday, November 11, 2007

Much has been written about the importance of measuring the impact of leadership development programs or systems. Over the years I’ve been looking for practical, meaningful, and effective metrics. Here’s what I’ve settled on for now, and although I’m not completely satisfied with any single measure, a combination of these should give you a pretty good dashboard.

1. Company performance. The ultimate measure, nothing else really matters. In most cases, consistent great company performance can usually be attributed to great leadership. And of course, lousy leadership is usually the root cause of business failures.

2. External perception of leadership. External perception can be measured by awards, such as CEO Magazine “Best Companies for Leaders” and hundreds of individual leadership awards (CEO of the Year, CIO of the year, CFO of the Year, etc…).

3. Internal perception of leadership. Internal perception can be measured in two ways. First, if you’re using 360 leadership assessments, you can maintain an aggregate score of a single “overall effectiveness” question, or run a report that aggregates the average score for all questions. Second, you can pull questions out of your annual employee survey pertaining to leadership and look for year over year improvement. You can also compare your leaders to other companies if you’re using questions provided by a third party vendor, such as Gallop or the Leadership Practices Inventory.

4. Succession planning measures. Keep tract of the number of key positions filled by internal candidates or the number of “ready now” candidates for each key positions (bench strength).
5. Individual Development Plan (IDP) progress or completion. Track the completion of development activity for key leaders and succession candidate pools.

6. Leadership development training measures. Use the basic Kirkpatrick measures, satisfaction, knowledge, behavior change, and business results. Easier said than done for the last one, but it works in some cases. For example, you would expect a decrease in turnover and improvement in sales after the implementation of a successful sales manger hiring or coaching program.

7. Finally, the easiest measure and perhaps the one that has the biggest impact on your funding and career opportunities: ask your key stakeholders. Regular meetings with your top executives and other key stakeholders will ensure you’re efforts are hitting the mark. These meetings are a great way to continuously assess current and future needs, communicate your accomplishments, and check for satisfaction.

Please comment if you’ve had success using other measures or have questions or opinions on any of these.

Tuesday, November 6, 2007

Changing jobs is an often used and effective way to develop new leadership capabilities. I wrote the following guide when I worked for a large global company (“ABC”) to help support a strategy to move executives across at least two functions, businesses, and countries.

Execution of Great Moves for Leadership Excellence2X2X2 Executive Development Guide

IntroductionExecution of Great Moves is one of the key strategies to support our Leadership Excellence Strategy. Providing opportunities for new job changes across two functions, businesses, or geographies is a way to accelerate the cross-functional capability in our future executives.While job changes can be a powerful catalyst for development, they can also lead to the derailment of a promising high potential leader. There are inherent risks and pitfalls that can be avoided or need to be managed. This guide was developed as a way to ensure successful 2X2X2 executive developmental job changes and be a vaccination against possible derailment.It is designed to support HR Directors/Managers as they assist their highest potential executives prepare and navigate through these challenging job changes.The information in this guide is based on the lessons of experience of real executives. External lessons are drawn from the work of Morgan McCall, Michael Lombardo, and Robert Eichinger. ABC Executives who recently moved into new functions, businesses, and geographies and HR executives shared their lessons as well.

Lessons and AdviceDevelopment and resultsDevelopment assignments are not a free ride. These are not educational sabbaticals. The standards and expectations for the new assignment should not be lowered to accommodate a lack of experience. While there will be a huge learning curve – and significant challenges – greater success and learning will come when the executive enters the assignment with a winning mindset, vs. a “good enough to get by” mindset. Many executives said that the most powerful developmental experiences they ever had were challenging jobs where they were held accountable for measurable results. “Total immersion is much better than just putting your toe in the water. You need to have some longer range responsibility with measurable accountability – otherwise all you have to do is show up at the meetings.” “You have to held accountable to the same standards of those already in your new area.” “Hey, there’s no lifelines – if I’m a total screw-up, I don’t deserve it!”

Advice: Work with the executive’s sponsor to ensure the new job has measurable goals and accountability. Make sure the executive understands that a developmental move does not lower the standards – while making sure all of the support systems are in place to ensure their success.

Dealing with resistanceIdeally, it would be great if the executive has a genuine passion and interest for the new work. Being dragged into a new assignment kicking and screaming – or with ambivalence – will make an already challenging learning curve even more difficult to overcome. Sometimes an executive may not understand or accept that a job change is what’s needed – in fact, what’s required - in order to prepare them for a much higher level of responsibility. The career path to running a business at ABC will now look more like a “Z” (series of different jobs) than a “T” (narrow, vertical promotions). The move may be outside their comfort zone, perhaps lateral - or worse - be perceived as a step down due to loss of perks and status. They may be getting conflicting advice from other well-meaning sponsors, peers, or significant others.

Advice: Listen to the executive’s concerns. Probe to find out what the real issues are. Work with the executive and the sponsor to address as many of these concerns as possible. Is there any room to modify the assignment or the conditions? If a concern can not be addressed, you may just have to help the reluctant executive understand how the new assignment is critical to the organization’s long range success and will help them achieve their longer range career goals. One senior executive said, “Some of my best jobs – where I learned the most – were one’s that I initially did not want to take. Some were painful – but I would not have gotten to where I am today if I didn’t take the risk” Forcing a high potential to take job against their will is risky – real high potentials have too many choices and may leave if they don’t think the move is in their best interests.

Going from knowing the most to learning the mostGoing from a job where success has come from being the expert to an assignment that is new and different can be a humbling experience. Many executives have said that this is where they learned some of their most valuable lessons of leadership. “I always led from a position of knowledge. I was the expert and had all the answers. This last assignment forced me to develop a new leadership style. I had to really listen to others – to use my ears more than my mouth. I developed a genuine appreciation for the talents of those around me. I discovered that this is what’s really required of a General Manager – you can’t know it all.”

Advice: Help the executive understand that the single most critical competency identified for success in new jobs is learning agility. Help them develop this competency prior to the new job through targeted assignments, coaching, books, or articles. Help them learn to ask questions and listen. Help them write a development plan that targets the most critical areas to learn and how to best address their learning needs. Work with the incumbent or sponsor to proactively build a plan to address anticipated learning needs ahead of time.

The importance of never losing sight of strengthsThe challenge of learning new things every day can be exhausting and make it difficult to stay confident, motivated, and energized. “Every single element of your like is different! (New geography and function) I couldn’t even remember where the switch was to turn the lights on!” It’s important to make sure the executive placed in a development assignment knows that they do bring some unique value to the organization. People will want to know what the new leader brings to the table – they don’t want to hear “I’m here to learn” – especially in a turn-a-round assignment. “Let people know what you need to learn and what you bring to the table that will help solve their problems. They’ll appreciate that and want to help you.” “My sponsor was very good about letting people know why I was there and how I could help – it was a win-win – this really helped pave the way for me”.A caution regarding familiar strengths – it will be very tempting for the executive to want to gravitate to the things that they are already good at and avoid the things that are new. It’s important to help them figure out what the real priorities are, and pay attention to the things that really matter.

Advice: Help the executive make a list of strengths that they bring to the job. Share these with their new sponsor, and encourage that they be shared with other key stakeholders.

SponsorshipThe “receiving” executive plays a critical role in the success of a development job change. “Learning from others” is one of the most effective ways successful executives develop leadership capability. “I’ve been fortunate to have worked for some really outstanding (and very different) leaders when I’ve changed jobs. In fact, I probably learned more from these new relationships than I did from the actual work”. “There’s three things you need to have for a reasonable chance for success: the right person, the right environment/situation, and the right support system.” A senior executive (sponsor) said: “Senior Management support will remove the barriers. It’s my job to be really clear as to what’s expected, including specific deliverables and development goals, and to provide feedback and coaching.” “-------- was really instrumental. The very first day we say down and developed a 90 day plan – including who and where to visit, what to accomplish, what to learn and checkpoints.”A high potential executive in the midst of a job change should be encouraged, and assisted if needed, to cultivate multiple sponsorships. One executive referred to his sponsors as his “Board of Directors”.

Advice: Consider who the executive will be working with to be as important to the learning as the change in function, business, or geography. Treat it as another multiplier in a 2X2 Great Move. Help the receiving sponsor understand their role in the new executive’s success – including developing clear expectations and deliverables, being involved in the development plan, developing a 90 day transition plan, providing coaching and feedback, and removing barriers. Check in periodically with the executive to assess their sponsor relationships and assist if needed.

A “safety net”One way to help ensure a leader’s success in a new assignment is to make sure there is a “seasoned professional” available as a resource. Typically this is someone who might work for the new leader with deep expertise and experience but perhaps limited executive potential. This highly valuable person can not only help train the new leader, but help prevent a green high potential new leader from damaging the business.

FeedbackNew jobs bring many opportunities to receive new and different feedback. Feedback can be one of the most powerful catalysts for executive development – and a way to minimize the changes of derailment in a new job. Feedback is even more important during geographic moves, where a leader can become isolated from their established network and far removed from the watchful eyes of corporate headquarters.So why is good, timely, direct feedback one of the most under-utilized and poorly applied development tools used at ABC? The reasons are many: lack of skill in giving feedback, discomfort with giving and receiving feedback, managers know they should do it but business priorities come first, fear of retaliation, it’s not part of the ABC culture (conflict avoidance in direct settings), people often don’t want to hear or believe it, and lack of consequences for changing behavior. At ABC, we’ve attempted to address the lack of feedback by creating new and improved performance management systems, multi-rater feedback surveys, assessment centers, and hiring external coaches. While all of these tools can be effective (and often very expensive and time-consuming), they should not be used as a substitute for open, honest discussion between a executive and those that are in a position to observe their behavior in a variety of settings. While we all agree that in a perfect world, line executives should be providing feedback, the practical reality at ABC –at least for now – is that HR needs to take the lead in making sure feedback is occurring.Advice: Every HR Manager involved in executive development should include feedback skills in their own IDPs. Use all of the learning tools we preach to our clients – books, learning from others, courses, practice – teaching others starts with role modeling.Make sure feedback is provided from selection processes – especially involving key jobs and high potentials. Let the executive know how those involved in the selection decision perceive their strengths and weaknesses. While we tend to be most comfortable in sharing feedback around functional gaps, the executive often never hears about the “real” issues. Issues like arrogance, lack of composure, defensiveness, insensitivity, and political missteps are often discussed behind closed doors but rarely shared in a constructive way. These are the kind of issues that will follow an executive around until they eventually derail unless addressed. HR should have the ability to talk about these sensitive issues in a way that helps the executive understand the specific behaviors that need to change and why.HR should participate in IDP discussions, especially with direct reports to senior executives and high potentials.HR should ensure that semi-annual written feedback summaries are provided to each high potential and to each senior client executive.

How long is enough?Long enough to learn and make a significant contribution is what most executives would say. Generally, if the assignment is too short (less than 2 years) there is not enough time to have an impact. If too long, learning diminishes and the leader can feel plateaued or abandoned. Early career job assignment may not need to be as long; complicated assignments with more significant scope and responsibilities may need more time.Advice: 2-3 years seems to be a general rule of thumb.Preparing for the move - immersion in the detailsPreparation for a move can begin as soon as the move is identified. Although some executives can dive into a new assignment with little preparation (“Prepare? I Don’t! But than again, when I take a vacation, I just drive south – with no reservations, maps, or itinerary.” etc.), most will point to the importance of getting immersed in the details prior to starting. This immersion continues as a part of the executive’s 90 day transition plan. Some ways to prepare are to review business information such as strategy documentation, meeting notes, presentation material, competitive intelligence reports, and country/cultural information. If possible, spending some time with the incumbent can be valuable.Some suggest hiring an external industry expert for a day as a great way to quickly get up to speed and get a more objective view of the business.

Advice: Help the executive gather as much business information as possible. Share information and insights about the culture, work environment, politics, and people. Getting to know the people is as important as getting to know the business. “It’s the people stuff that really makes a difference!” “You have to know who the anti-bodies are – and deal with them quickly.” HR can assist in providing IDPs (with pictures), resumes, performance appraisals, and talent reviews. Some executives found it beneficial to ask their team to prepare their own background information.HR can also assist with the logistics of geographic moves. “------ was terrific. When I got there, I had a rented house, fully furnished, stocked with food, clean sheets, etc.. In two days I was settled in and could hit the ground running. You could tell he had done this before. For the last move (smaller company), I had none of this. I was on my own. It took me three months to get high speed internet access for my computer!”

Formal Executive EducationThe best time to participate in a formal executive education program is right before a new job assignment. A general management program is an excellent way to prepare for a new GM role. Functional programs (Finance, Marketing and Sales) can help fill in experience gaps. For geographic moves, attending a program in the new country can be a great way to get exposed to the new culture and learn about the local business environment.

Thursday, November 1, 2007

Six Q LeadershipExcerpt from “The ROI on People- The 7 Vectors of ResearchRobert W. Eichenger and Michael Lombardo

According to Day and Lord (1986), differences in the quality of executive leadership explain as much as 45 percent of an organization’s performance. Hunter and Schmidt (1990) suggest that it might be 48% for those executives who rank one standard deviation above average. Zenger and Folkman (2002) report that the top 10% of leaders produce five times as much net profit as the bottom 10 %, and twice as much as average leaders.

What does this enlightened leader look like? That debate has been going on since the invention of the printing press, and prior to that, since the spoken word. Does a top leader fit a single pattern? No. Do top leaders have some elements in common? Yes.

All of the research to date can be summarized in six Qs.

1. IQ – Intelligence QuotientTop leaders are smarter than the rest. They have to sift through mountains of data, perhaps missing important pieces, and make decisions quickly. They have to track many simultaneous activities and streams of thought. The good news is that most of the people who get to top management positions are smart enough. There is no shortage of bright people.

2. TQ – Technical/Operational QuotientTop leaders know the business. They have the functional and technical skills and knowledge necessary to make intelligent decisions and take prudent action. They have the operational skills to make things happen. Again, the news is good. Most who get there have this set of skills.

3. MQ – Motivational QuotientTop leaders are super-motivated. They are ambitious. They make life sacrifices to climb the organizational career ladder. They work long hours. They travel a lot. They relocate frequently. They have to want it. Again, most who get there have the necessary motivation to lead and persevere.

4. Experience QuotientTop leaders have had skill-building experiences along the way. We know from extensive research at CCL (Lombardo) that specific experiences can teach specific skills. Start-ups teach different skills than fix-its. Here the record is mixed. Many people get to the top without much diverse experience. They are especially deficient on global experience. It is almost impossible to add that experience if they are already at the top.

5. People QuotientTop leaders are effective with people. They are able to relate to diverse audiences. They can get things done through others. They can influence and inspire. They adapt their actions to the needs of the people with whom they are interacting. They read people accurately. They know how to motivate people one at a time, in groups, or in entire enterprises. Here the news is dismal. People like Goleman, Boyatzis, and Spencer (2001) all report that this skill set is often missing. All of the derailment studies cited above list some version of PQ deficiency as the driving cause of failure among managers and executives.

6. Learning QuotientTop leaders who rank in the upper portion of success (they are more effective than other top leaders) are the more learning-agile, which Bennis (2002) calls “adaptive capacity”, the hallmark of effective leadership. Lombardo and Eichinger (2004) have shown that it is associated with being a high potential learner; these learners perform much better after promotion than do the average and low learning-agile. Sternberg reports that LQ has a higher correlation (relationship) to success than IQ.

What this means is that effective leaders are lifelong learners. Learners of the soft stuff. Learning agility relates to learning to think, feel, act, and believe differently based upon experience and changing circumstances. Here the news is also mixed. Probably one-third of people who get to the top are learning-agile. Studies of why people fail (Finkelstein, 2003; Dottlich, 2003; Lombardo; Bennis, 2002; Zenger, 2002) all include some version of the lack of willingness and ability to adapt and learn from experience.

To really benefit from XQ, a leader also would need LQ. If someone had LQ but did not go through career-building experiences, that person wouldn’t develop the necessary skills to be considered one of the most effective leaders.